April 1
With Gail Kilgore's resignation as the SC Representative from the NWPL
Region, the NWPL seat on the Advisory Board is now empty. (The NWPL region
is made up of the following states: Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa,
Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington
and Wyoming.) According to the Project's bylaws, Section VI and Section IX
of the Standard Rules, the following applies:

When a vacancy occurs on the Advisory Board:

USGenWeb Bylaws Article VI, Subsection H applies along with the following:
The vacancy will be announced on the Board mailing list and the appropriate
regional mailing list(s) within two days. Within five days the Advisory
Board will call for volunteers for the position. Volunteers must meet the
eligibility requirements for the position. Within fifteen days of the call,
volunteers must submit their names to the National Coordinator and/or the
Representative At Large. Within 30 days of the announced vacancy, the
Advisory Board will elect, by 2/3 majority, a replacement from the pool of
volunteers.

USGenWeb Bylaws Article VI, Section I lists the qualifications that must be
met by the nominees.

In compliance with the above stated reference, the vacancy is formally
posted here and a copy will be forwarded to the State-Coordinator's and
USGenWeb-NW mailing lists. Interested volunteers should submit a completed
Volunteer Form located at
http://usgenweb.org/volform.shtml. Volunteer forms
must be received by 8 pm EDT 18 September 2009.

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator
April 2
Correction to the date that applications from interested volunteers - the
applications/volunteer interest forms are due 15 April 2010.

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator

April 10
Reposting as a reminder - applications are being accepted through 15 April
2010. Sherri Bradley

Call for Grievance Committee volunteer mediators and arbitrators

The Grievance Committee of USGENWEB hereby formally requests candidates for
the position of Mediator/Arbitrator. Candidates should have past experience
in their personal or professional lives that reflects the following
attributes:

(1) An even disposition

(2) Reliability and timeliness

(3) An ability to suspend judgment and distance themselves from their own
views in order to hear other points of view

(4) An ability and willingness to propose solutions that are fair, equitable
and consistent with the policies and philosophy of the Project

(5) Good basic communication [writing by e-mail] skills and an ability to
compromise and get along with others.

Interested individuals should send the following information to John Quigley
Chair, Grievance Committee at jquigley2@gmail.com with the phrase
"Mediator/Arbitrator Candidate" in the subject line. John will then forward
the submitted material in confidence to the other Committee members for
review and selection. The necessary information is:

(1) Your name

(2) Your e-mail address

(3) Your current position(s) in the USGENWEB Project or an affiliated
Special Project--you must be a Member

(4) A brief statement of why you believe you would be qualified for this
volunteer position.

If selected, a Mediator will be asked to Mediate disputes, listen to
evidence and arguments from the disputing parties, develop and propose
solutions, and provide a logical rationale for their proposals.

An Arbitrator will be asked to help arbitrate disputes, listen to evidence
and arguments from the disputing parties, and make a judgment as to the
side which wins the case. Training and guidance from the Grievance Committee
members will be provided. The Committee will be reasonable in its requests
and time expectations of appointed Mediators and Arbitrators.

John Quigley
CC Kinney County TX
Chair, Grievance Committee

MOTION: 2009/10-22A Motion to Augment the Grievance Procedures

April 2
I know I saw several posts to different mail lists where the motion had been
forwarded asking for input, but haven't seen any responses here. Is there
any further discussion on this motion?

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator

I believe that several members had objected to this wording and a revision
was released that was more widely accepted.

Dale Grimm

I do.

the motion MUST state exact where the changes are to be. It can NOT be
any other way.

David Samuelsen

April 3
Let the record show that motion 2009/10-22A has been withdrawn by Tina
Vickery and the second has been withdrawn by Jeff Kemp.

April 5
I have received a couple of comments from members of the NENC region, which I am
sharing here, regarding the motion that was on the floor over the Grievance
Committee procedures. These had been sent to me several days ago, I was waiting
to see if there were any other comments, plus we didn't seem to be discussing
this at the moment. Some things to consider.

Alice
NENC CC Rep
---------------------------------------------

#1: Results of the grievance procedure should be based on the grievance itself,
not what occurs during the procedure. This is not to say that there shouldn't be
some kind of penalty for leaking information, but that should be considered
separately.

In any case, regarding this sentence:

> If the confidentiality is breached by someone outside of the parties
> involved, the parties involved should not be penalized, unless it is evident
>that a party to the grievance is intentionally feeding information, after
>the grievance process began, to the one that broke the confidentiality.

The confidentiality could not possibly be breached by someone outside of the
process without someone inside the process first breaching the process to the
outsider. This sentence should be rewritten to reflect this necessity.

--------------------------------------
#2

What isn't logical about the proposed grievance confidentiality issue ...
everything. It does not compute. It is totally illogical. Only what happens
during mediation and/or arbitration can be considered confidential, and
that's already in the Procedures.

Person A is guilty -- types up their grievance in great detail giving a
minute-by-minute account of everything that transpired over a one month
period including as evidence 99 emails between them and who the grievance
is filed against. At 1:00 pm they post their grievance on every list and
blog they know of. At 1:01 pm they file their grievance. At 1:02 pm they
start talking about their grievance at great length on the list. They can't
be accused of breaking confidentiality, because they posted all the details
before they filed.

Person B is innocent -- types up their grievance and it says only "My SC
fired me because I was in the hospital for one month and couldn't perform
the mandatory every-30-days site update." At 1:00 pm they file their
grievance. At 1:01 pm still groggy from pain meds they intend to send a
message to their wife saying, "My SC fired me because I was in the hospital
for one month and couldn't perform the mandatory every-30-days site
update," but it goes to the Discuss list accidently. At 1:02 pm their
grievance is dismissed because they broke confidentiality.

Results -- the guilty is innocent, and the innocent is guilty. Is that
justice?

This is a case of the more rules there are, the more chances the
wrong-doers can get away with breaking them, and the innocent can be
punished. This agenda item should be withdrawn.
Alice Allen

April 22
The question has been called on Motion 2009/10-23 by Tina Vickery and
seconded by Jeff Kemp. As stated below by Tina, a 2/3 majority is required
to pass, which would call for an immediate vote on the motion being
discussed.

Please signify your response to the Calling of the Question by either
"agree" (which would indicate that your choice is that a vote on Motion
2009/10-23 would be taken immediately) or "disagree" (which would indicate
that discussion should continue on Motion 2009/10-23).

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator
Additional communications and information on this issue can be seen here http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/BOARD/2010-04.

April 19
Presented by Larry Flesher and seconded by Ann Allen Geoghegan and dated 19
April 2010, the motion reads:

The grievance process begins when the grievance is filed with the Grievance
Committee. Once received by the Grievance Committee Chair, a notice will be
submitted to the Advisory Board and posted on the EXEC list that includes
the names of all parties involved and a short (5-10 words max) description
of the violation. This will serve as the Advisory Board's cue to cease and
desist any involvement until and unless the grievance resolution is
appealed.

The grievance confidentiality begins when the grievance is filed with the
Grievance Committee. The party filing the grievance must acknowledge AT THE
TIME OF FILING that they understand and agree to abide by the
confidentiality of the grievance process. All other parties must
acknowledge AT THE TIME OF NOTIFICATION that a grievance has been filed that
they understand and agree to abide by the confidentiality of the grievance
process.

Grievance confidentiality extends to all parties (including the mediators,
arbitrators and GC members) from the time the grievance process begins.
Failure by one of the parties to agree to abide by the confidentiality of
the grievance process is grounds to automatically and immediately lose the
grievance.

The consequences for breaking the confidentiality of the grievance process
will be:

. If the grievance team determines one of the parties to the grievance has
broken confidentiality, that party automatically and immediately loses the
grievance with no option to re-file.

. A general statement such as "I've filed a grievance and cannot discuss it"
in answer to a question is not considered a breach.

. If the confidentiality is breached by someone outside of the parties
involved, the parties involved should not be penalized.

. If the confidentiality is broken by the mediator, an arbitrator or the GC
representative to the mediation/arbitration portion of the grievance, the
grievance gets reassigned to give the parties involved another chance to get
the issue resolved.

. Consequences for breaching the confidentiality of the grievance process by
someone outside of the grievance will be determined on a case-by-case basis
by the Advisory Board that may include a disciplinary hearing and penalties
applied based on the results of the findings.

Specifically, the following modifications to the Standing Rules will be
made:

Section V of the Standing Rules, item E, number 1 will be modified to read:
The grievance process begins when a complaint is made by any of the
following: (Items a-c remain unchanged.) In addition, the following will
be added as a separate item after the last paragraph of number 1. "The
grievance confidentiality begins when the grievance is filed with the
Grievance Committee and extends to all parties (including the mediators,
arbitrators and GC members) from the time the grievance process begins.

Item E, number 2 will be modified to read: The initial complaint should be
brought to the Grievance Coordinator, and must include the following
information: (Items a-f remain unchanged.) Item g will be added, which will
state "An acknowledgement that the member understands that the
confidentiality of the grievance process begins when the complaint is filed
and that they agree to abide by the confidentiality of the grievance
process."

Item E, the first paragraph of subsection number 4 will be modified to read:
"Upon receiving the initial complaint, the Grievance Coordinator will assign
it a number, and appoint one of the permanent committee members to review
the complaint to determine whether it meets the requirements outlined in
subsection C of this Section. At the same time, the Grievance Committee
Chair will send a notice to the Advisory Board and to be posted on the
BOARD-EXEC mail list that includes the names of all parties involved and a
short (5-10 word max) description of the violation. This will serve as the
Advisory Board's cue to cease and desist any involvement until and unless
the grievance resolution is appealed."

The second paragraph of subsection 4 will be modified to read: "The review
of the complaint will result in an "accept" or "reject" determination from
the Committee Member assigned. The review at this level should assume that
the facts stated in the complaint are true, and the determination of the
viability of the grievance made based upon a review of the by-laws,
policies, or procedures alleged to have been violated. The recommendation
and the reasons therefore, shall be provided to the Grievance Committee as a
whole, and voted upon."

The fourth paragraph of subsection 4 will be modified to read: "If accepted
as a viable grievance, the parties shall be so informed. The parties must
acknowledge at the time of notification that a grievance has been filed and
that they understand and agree to abide by the confidentiality of the
grievance process. Failure to agree to abide by the confidentiality of the
grievance process is grounds to automatically and immediately lose the
grievance. A Committee Member, volunteer mediator and two volunteer
arbitrators will be assigned. The parties to the grievance, the Committee
Member, mediator, and arbitrators will then be subscribed to a private email
list."

The first paragraph of subsection 6 will be modified to read: " When the
team is seated, the parties shall be so advised by the Mediator. Everyone
will be reminded that the grievance confidentiality extends to all parties
(including the mediators, arbitrators and GC members) from the time the
grievance process begins and that failure to abide by the confidentiality of
the grievance process is grounds to automatically and immediately lose the
grievance. The parties shall have seventy-two (72) hours to submit to the
Mediator a written statement of their position on the issues of the dispute.
The mediator shall provide the position statements to the team members for
their review."

The current subsection 9 will be renumbered to subsection 10.

The following subsection will be inserted between the current section 8 and
the former subsection 9 (newly renumbered to section 10) and will be
numbered as subsection 9:

The consequences for breaking the confidentiality of the grievance process
will be:

. If the grievance team determines one of the parties to the grievance has
broken the confidentiality, that party automatically and immediately loses
the grievance with no option to re-file.

. A general statement such as "I've filed a grievance and cannot discuss it"
in answer to a question is not considered a breach.

. If the confidentiality is breached by someone outside of the parties
involved, the parties involved should not be penalized, unless it is evident
that a party to the grievance is intentionally feeding information, after
the grievance process began, to the one that broke the confidentiality.

. If the confidentiality is broken by the mediator, an arbitrator or the GC
representative in the mediation/arbitration portion of the grievance, the
grievance gets reassigned to give the parties involved another chance to get
the issue resolved. Consequences for the GC representative are referenced
in Section V of the Standard Rules, Subsection A, under the "Qualifications"
item. (Link to the section above.)
b. Consequences for breaching the confidentiality of the grievance process
by someone outside of the grievance will be determined on a case-by-case
basis by the Advisory Board that may include a disciplinary hearing and
penalties applied based on the results of the findings.

. Consequences for breaching the confidentiality of the grievance process by
someone outside of the grievance will be determined on a case-by-case basis
by the Advisory Board that may include a disciplinary hearing and penalties
applied based on the results of the findings.

Discussion is now open. If you have no discussion, please indicate by
stating "No Discussion".

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator

April 24
With more than one third of the AB members voting "Disagree", the motion to
call the question fails. Discussion will continue on motion 2009/10-23.

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator

April 24
A motion to table motion 2009/10-23 has been made by David Samuelsen and
seconded by Alice Allen.

Those in favor of tabling motion 2009/10-23 temporarily, please respond with
"agree". Those opposed, please respond with "disagree".
Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator

April 25
With 12 members voting, the motion to table motion 2009/10-23 fails.

Those voting to table the motion: Alice Allen, Colleen Pustola, Linda Lewis
and W. David Samuelsen

April 27
In the interest of letting everyone see what's been suggested I've put up a
mockup of the changes to the rules. Maybe this will allow us to see more
clearly the suggested changes. The mockup is at
http://kykinfolk.com/temp/amended-standard-rules-4-27.htm - does this help?

Sherri

April 29
It has been moved by Tina Vickery and Seconded by Les Shockey that further
action on motion 2009/10-23 be postponed until the Naming of the NWPL SC
Representative, the appointment of a permanent Secretary and the approval
of the CC/SC Guidelines document agenda items have been dealt with.

Those in favor of postponing action on motion 2009/10-23, as listed above,
please respond with "agree". Those opposed, please respond with "disagree".

Additional communications and information on this issue can be seen here http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/BOARD/2010-04

MOTION: 2009/10-24 Move to Appoint unexpired seat of NWPL SC Rep

April 30
Presented by Larry Flesher and seconded by Tina Vickery and dated 30 April
2010, motion 2009/10-24 reads:

"I move to appoint Bill Oliver to fill the unexpired term as NWPL SC
Representative."

Is there any discussion on this motion? If not, please indicate by
responding "no discussion".

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator
For the record, Bill Oliver was the only applicant that met the qualifications
of having served as SC or ASC for the previous 12 months. These requirements are
stated in Section VI.I of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, found at
http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/bylaws.shtml.

1st Quarter EC Report

April 18
For the record - Are there any additions or corrections? If not, the report
will stand as approved on 21 April 2010 @ 8:00 p.m.

April 28
For the record, it has just come to the attention of the Advisory Board that
an inadvertent omission occurred when Standard Rule V. B., Committee
Business, was updated after motion 2009/10-07 was passed. The first
paragraph of Section B was deleted when the update was made to the second
paragraph. (Motion 2009/10-07 only involved the only the second paragraph
of section B.) I have corrected the omission and reinserted the first
paragraph where it belongs and have requested that the Grievance Committee
Procedures posted at http://gc.usgenweb.org/procedures.html also be
corrected.

Sherri Bradley
National Coordinator
April 28
It has just come to my attention that when the Standard Rules page was
updated after motion 2009/10-07 was passed that there was an oversight that
needs to be corrected. Motion 2009/10-07 modified the second paragraph of
section B of the Standard Rules/Grievance Procedures. When the update was
made to the page, the first paragraph of that section was deleted
inadvertently.

The original wording of that first paragraph needs to be re-added to the
Standard Rules page and to the current motion being discussed.

When the floor is available, I will move that the original wording be re-added
to correct this situation.

Larry Flesher
SWSC SC Rep

Announcement: USGenWeb Project featured in Archives.com article

Volunteer Projects Help Family Historians. Congratulations to our National
Coordinator, Sherri Bradley for writing this article where the USGenWeb Project
is featured!

http://experts.archives.com/
Tina Vickery

ADJOURNMENT

Sherri Bradley adjourned the April meeting on 3 May, 2010 and convened the May
meeting.

Please remember that minutes are a record of actions proposed and taken
at the meeting, NOT all the detail about what was said by members or guests.
If you have any questions or comments about the minutes, please write
to Linda Davenport, Secretary.